Did human-caused climate change lead to war in Syria?Based only on the mainstream press headlines, you almost certainly would think so.
Reading further into the articles where the case is laid out, a few caveats appear, but the chain of events seems strong.
The mechanism? An extreme drought in the Fertile Crescent region—one that a new study finds was made worse by human greenhouse gas emissions—added a spark to the tinderbox of tensions that had been amassing in Syria for a number of years under the Assad regime (including poor water management policies).
It is not until you dig pretty deep into the technical scientific literature, that you find out that the anthropogenic climate change impact on drought conditions in the Fertile Crescent is extremely minimal and tenuous—so much so that it is debatable as to whether it is detectable at all.
This is not to say that a strong and prolonged drought didn’t play some role in the Syria’s pre-war unrest—perhaps it did, perhaps it didn’t (a debate we leave up to folks much more qualified than we are on the topic)—but that the human-influenced climate change impact on the drought conditions was almost certainly too small to have mattered.
In other words, the violence would almost certainly have occurred anyway.
Several tidbits buried in the scientific literature are relevant to assessing the human impact on the meteorology behind recent drought conditions there.
It is true that climate models do project a general drying trend in the Mediterranean region (including the Fertile Crescent region in the Eastern Mediterranean) as the climate warms under increasing greenhouse gas concentrations. There are two components to the projected drying. The first is a northward expansion of the subtropical high pressure system that typically dominates the southern portion of the region. This poleward expansion of the high pressure system would act to shunt wintertime storm systems northward, increasing precipitation over Europe but decreasing precipitation across the Mediterranean. The second component is an increase in the temperature which would lead to increased evaporation and enhanced drying.
Our analysis will show that the connection between this drought and human-induced climate change is tenuous at best, and tendentious at worst.
An analysis in the new headline-generating paper by Colin Kelley and colleagues that just appeared in the Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences shows the observed trend in the sea level pressure across the eastern Mediterranean as well as the trend projected to have taken place there by a collection of climate models. We reproduce this graphic as Figure 1. If the subtropical high is expanding northward over the region, the sea level pressure ought to be on the rise. Indeed, the climate models (bottom panel) project a rise in the surface pressure over the 20th century (blue portion of the curve) and predict even more of a rise into the future (red portion of the curve). However, the observations (top panel, green line) do not corroborate the model hypothesis under the normative rules of science. Ignoring the confusing horizontal lines included by the authors, several things are obvious. First, the level of natural variability is such that no overall trend is readily apparent.
[Note: The authors identify an upwards trend in the observations and describe it as being “marginally significant (P < 0.14)”. In nobody’s book (except, we guess, these authors) is a P-value of 0.14 “marginally significant”—it is widely accepted in the scientific literature that P-values must be less than 0.05 for them to be considered statistically significant (i.e., there is a less than 1 in 20 chance that chance alone would produce a similar result). That’s normative science. We’ve seen some rather rare cases where authors attached the term “marginally” significant to P-values up to 0.10, but 0.14 (about a 1 in 7 chance that chance didn’t produce it) is taking things a bit far, hence our previous usage of the word “tendentious.”]
Whether or not there is an identifiable overall upwards trend, the barometric pressure in the region during the last decade of the record (when the Syrian drought took place) is not at all unusual when compared to other periods in the region’s pressure history—including periods that took place long before large-scale greenhouse gas emissions were taking place.
Consequently, there is little in the pressure record to lend credence to the notion that human-induced climate change played a significant role in the region’s recent drought.

Figure 1. Observed (top) and modeled (bottom) sea level pressure for the Eastern Mediterranean region (figure adapted from Kelley et al., 2015).
Another clue that the human impact on the recent drought was minimal (at best) comes from a 2012 paper in the Journal of Climate by Martin Hoerling and colleagues. In that paper, Hoerling et al. concluded that about half of the trend towards late-20th century dry conditions in the Mediterranean region was potentially attributable to human emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols. They found that climate models run with increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases and aerosols produce drying across the Mediterranean region in general. However, the subregional patterns of the drying are sensitive to the patterns of sea surface temperature (SST) variability and change. Alas, the patterns of SST changes are quite different in reality than they were projected to be by the climate models. Hoerling et al. describe the differences this way “In general, the observed SST differences have stronger meridional [North-South] contrast between the tropics and NH extratropics and also a stronger zonal [East-West] contrast between the Indian Ocean and the tropical Pacific Ocean.”
Figure 2 shows visually what Hoerling was describing—the observed SST change (top) along with the model projected changes (bottom) for the period 1971-2010 minus 1902-1970. Note the complexity that accompanies reality.

Figure 2. Cold season (November–April) sea surface temperature departures (°C) for the period 1971–2010 minus 1902–70: (top) observed and (bottom) mean from climate model projections (from Hoerling et al., 2012).
Hoerling et al. show that in the Fertile Crescent region, the drying produced by climate models is particularly enhanced (by some 2-3 times) if the observed patterns of sea surface temperatures are incorporated into the models rather than patterns that would otherwise be projected by the models (i.e., the top portion of Figure 2 is used to drive the model output rather than the bottom portion).
Let’s be clear here. The models were unable to accurately reproduce the patterns of SST that have been observed as greenhouse gas concentrations increased. So the observed data were substituted for the predicted value, and then that was used to generate forecasts of changed rainfall. We can’t emphasize this enough: what was not supposed to happen from climate change was forced into the models that then synthesized rainfall.
Figure 3 shows these results and Figure 4 shows what has been observed. Note that even using the prescribed SST, the model predicted changes in Figure 3 (lower panel) are only about half as much as has been observed to have taken place in the region around Syria (Figure 4, note scale difference). This leaves the other half of the moisture decline largely unexplained. From Figure 3 (top), you can also see that only about 10mm out of more than 60mm of observed precipitation decline around Syria during the cold season is “consistent with” human-caused climate change as predicted by climate models left to their own devices.
Nor does “consistent with” mean “caused by” it.

Figure 3. Simulated change in cold season precipitation (mm) over the Mediterranean region based on the ensemble average (top) of 22 IPCC models run with observed emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols and (bottom) of 40 models run with observed emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols with prescribed sea surface temperatures. The difference plots in the panels are for the period 1971–2010 minus 1902–70 (source: Hoerling et al., 2012).
For comparative purposes, according to the University of East Anglia climate history, the average cold-season rainfall in Syria is 261mm (10.28 inches). Climate models, when left to their own devices, predict a decline averaging about 10mm, or 3.8 per cent of the total. When “prescribed” (some would use the word “fudged”) sea surface temperatures are substituted for their wrong numbers, the decline in rainfall goes up to a whopping 24mm, or 9.1 per cent of the total. For additional comparative purposes, population has roughly tripled in the last three decades.

Figure 4. Observed change in cold season precipitation for the period 1971–2010 minus 1902–70. Anomalies (mm) are relative to the 1902–2010 (source: Hoerling et al., 2012).
So what you are left with after carefully comparing the patterns of observed changes in the meteorology and climatology of Syria and the Fertile Crescent region to those produced by climate models, is that the lion’s share of the observed changes are left unexplained by the models run with increasing greenhouse gases. Lacking a better explanation, these unexplained changes get chalked up to “natural variability”—and natural variability dominates the observed climate history.
You wouldn’t come to this conclusion from the cursory treatment of climate that is afforded in the mainstream press. It requires an examination of scientific literature and a good background and understanding of the rather technical research being discussed. Like all issues related to climate change, the devil is in the details, and, in the haste to produce attention grabbing headlines, the details often get glossed over or dismissed.
Our bottom line: the identifiable influence of human-caused climate change on recent drought conditions in the Fertile Crescent was almost certainly not the so-called straw that broke the camel’s back and led to the outbreak of conflict in Syria. The pre-existing (political) climate in the region was plenty hot enough for a conflict to ignite, perhaps partly fuelled by recent drought conditions—conditions which are part and parcel of the region climate and the intensity and frequency of which remain dominated by natural variability, even in this era of increasing greenhouse gas emissions from human activities.
References:
Hoerling, M., et al., 2012. On the increased frequency of Mediterranean drought. Journal of Climate, 25, 2146-2161.
Kelley, C. P., et al., 2015. Climate change in the Fertile Crescent and implications of the recent Syrian drought. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, doi:10.1073/pnas.1421533112
The Current Wisdom is a series of monthly articles in which Patrick J. Michaels, director of the Center for the Study of Science, reviews interesting items on global warming in the scientific literature that may not have received the media attention that they deserved, or have been misinterpreted in the popular press.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Dark Ages ways do not ft so well with modern life spans.
It’s noteworthy how consistently the observed field of temperature or precipitation shows much stronger regional contrasts than the modeled field. This points unmistakably to the fuzzy inadequacies of the modeling premises.
One can’t help wonder if Obama’s public “obsession” with climate change is a means to hide the real and serious issues facing the country from its people.
Why would you wonder? I have been watching CNBC et al today on both Policing and ISIS. There is serious stuff out there that this POTUS is choosing to ignore for ideological reasons while being aided and abetted by his minions.
I see it as a diversionary tactic.
Yeah, it’s not other threats he’s deflecting attention from, it’s the ones he’s complicit in.
It is embarrassing, really, to hear that much idiotic prattle, or lying, from our President. That really is more than what politics should countenance. If he believes what he said he’s ignorant, if not, he’s immoral.
Both?
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26116868
No mention of climate cause here. Suprising, since it is from the BBC
so if we cease all fossil fuel energy production, droughts will never again happen and wars become a thing of the past?
these people have lost their minds
as anyone considered that CO2 may cause brain damage, not atmospheric warming?
I was going to say something, but I became afraid.
The climate can change and the sea ice can be altered to open up a shipping passage to Russia. However this could happen regardless of co2. There is no evidence that i see that this will happen in the very near future. We also could be slammed by a massive asteroid. Where is the military defense for that? I’m pretty sure this is a way to get the public slowly ready for military forced global climate action. Slowly but surely.
Bush’s take on the speech…
http://www.orrazz.com/2015/05/jeb-bush-rails-against-intellectual.html
Choosing to blame the conflict on climate (or any other root cause) is a shameful tactic to distract public attention from the politics that sustains and extends this brutal conflict. The fact is that ISIS is a relatively small force that would be swept from the field in weeks by boots on the ground by any western military. If occasional air strikes could destroy terrorist organizations, Hamas and Hezbollah would have ceased to exist long ago. Occasional air strikes are for show.
More people have died in this conflict than in all the Arab-Israeli wars combined. Yet the west sits on its hands even as the media ceases reporting the deaths as tens of thousands and begins reporting them in the hundreds. Must it reach the millions before the west takes action? The fact of the matter is that the middle east is a quagmire that nobody wants to get sucked into. But worse than that, is that it is a quagmire whose very existence is a benefit to a lot of countries.
Turkey – much of the battle against ISIS is being carried by the Kurds. Turkey is resisting arming them and is constraining their supply lines across the Turkish border. A strong and autonomous Kurdish enclave in Syria and Iraq would ultimately try and unite with separatist minded Kurds in Turkey. The longer Kurdish strength is sapped by ISIS, the less Turkey has to worry about confronting separatist Kurds on their own soil.
Israel – Hezbollah is being bled dry in both fighters and munitions as they rush to the defense of Assad. The longer the better from Israel’s point of view, as Hezbollah cannot possibly start anything with Israel while fully engaged in Syria. As an added bonus for Israel, Iran cut funding to Hamas after Hamas refused their request for fighters to support Hezbollah and Assad.
Lebanon – doesn’t want to get caught in the cross fire of another Israel-Hezbollah dust up, so watching Hezbollah bleed in Syria is just fine with them, the longer the better.
Syria – ISIS has been a stroke of luck for Assad. He is a brutal and viscous dictator who would have been removed from power by now except that his enemy has metastasized into something so much more brutal and viscous than he is, that he looks almost acceptable by comparison.
Iran – while the war isn’t to Iran’s benefit per se, it is important to understand why they sustain Assad. Without their support, he’d be long gone, so what does Iran get out of keeping him in power? The answer is access to the Syrian border with Israel which they want to turn into a staging area for war. They already control Israel’s border with Lebanon through Hezbollah, and they are attempting to repair their frayed relationships with Hamas in order to control the border with Gaza as well. In brief, Iran has no special place in their heart for Assad, they just want access to that border and Assad is the easiest path to that.
The West – you think the rest of us aren’t culpable also? Western governments make a big show of preventing would be jihadists from leaving the west to join ISIS. They argue those jihadists would get training and experience and potentially return to be a threat from within western countries. Bullsh*t. Most of the jihadists that get to Syria never return. They die right there. Most of the attacks and attempted attacks we’ve seen recently in western countries have been carried about by jihadists that were inspired by ISIS but couldn’t find their way to Syria to join them. Western police forces will shed few tears for those that slip through their fingers and wind up dying in Syria or Iraq.
The bottom line is that there are an awful lot of vested interests who don’t much care if the carnage continues for decades. We should be collectively ashamed of ourselves. The hand wringing about the root cause possibly being climate related is as shameful as could possibly be. As I said above, more people have died in this mess than all the Arab-Israeli wars combined. The effort put forth by the UN and western countries in general to end this horror is a fraction of what they have spent on the two state solution.
For Shame.
Remember Libya and the Right 2 Protect (R2P) Doctrine that we were all force fed by Rice, Clinton et al as the reason for going into Libya in the first place (and Cameron shame on you). I agree with you (dhm) 100% and rather than we “should be ashamed”, I am.
Remember this hog wash…”Right to Protect” as THE excuse for going into Libya?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8350014/We-must-stand-ready-to-intervene-in-Libya.html
Now take a look at these pictures, this time from Iraq and the ISIS mayhem currently ongoing. Where are Rice, Clinton et al and their mealy mouthed BS today. What a disgusting bunch of LW delusional numb nuts.
http://pamelageller.com/2014/06/al-graphic-jihad-group-isis-releases-photos-mass-execution.html/
More like D&Q: Divide and conquer.
“dmh
May 21, 2015 at 7:11 pm
Bullsh*t. Most of the jihadists that get to Syria never return. They die right there.”
I’d agree with this. Here in Australia we have had known “fighters” leave for Syria to fight with ISIS. many were known to “authorities”. Who knows why they were not stopped at the border, one or two used fake passports (Apparently). Now, those that left the relative safety of Australia for Syria, want the Aussie Govn’t to help them get out and back home. Seriously? They leave a safe country to go to a war zone to fight in a war? What did these people expect? I have a feeling they are stuck there and will suffer the consequences of their choices! Reality really does suck!
Better to tag those “fighters” like Judas fish.
Anyone who says climate has always changed is a climate change denier…….somehow….
Thanks Paul C. “Chip” Knappenberger and Patrick J. Michaels.
This is good research.
But, we don’t have accurate CO2 measurements older than 150 years ago. Thousands of direct, from the atmosphere, analysis have been made since then which prove that ice cores are not even close enough for the study of recent levels. Over 800 thousand years, the accuracy should be laughed at.
At one time, covering approximately 2 billion years, there was little oxygen and an estimated 70% CO2.
So, the “point of no return” from carbon hell “happened” at 350 ppm…. but, we made it just fine from 700,000 ppm
Ice cores under report levels of CO2…a fact every climate modeler / anti-observer needs to be confronted with.
Why was the accuracy of ice cores as a source of data never vetted?
What kind of serious research can be conducted using faulty data?
What kind of chemist measures the results of a reaction, but does not measure the quantity of reactants?
I know not what they are called.
But, a baker that never bothers to measure ingredients….
an HVAC tech that doesn’t measure pressure or pounds .of refrigerant…
or a doctor that never checks vital signs,
are traditionally called un-employable.
Cooling and drying makes droughts. And if natural variability can dominate anytime, at “the drop of a hat”, then it is always in charge.
After his Civics lessons from Fidel, O is apparently taking Science lessons from Kim Jong Un.
I’ve been following the AGW story for a couple of years now but I still have’nt heard a convincing explanation as to why so many prominent politicians are prepared to prostitute themselves to the CAGW meme. Can anybody help?
Those with the gold make the rules.
Bingo!
Its taken me more than a couple of year to begin to understand. This blog has completely changed my view of the world and to those whom don’t agree with me. Tim said it above; divide and conquer. The CAGW meme is a convenient tool to pit neighbor against neighbor globally, class warfare, left vs right, however you want to frame it. Doing so serves several purposes for politicians.
Neighbor pointing the finger against Neighbor for politicians is better than neighbor with neighbor pointing the finger at them, the way it should be. Neighbor against neighbor is also solved politically by more state power. Liberty only survives where class envy does not reign supreme.
I am seeing a major change taking place in this blog that seems to sense or recognize that and this thread is most refreshing to see that taking place. The climate change hoax is so blatant and potentially costly (profit to a few) that it just might be the catalyst that starts to reunite neighbor with neighbor.
Obama has done a wonderful job of pitting American against American leading to the socialist answer. To me socialism is the ultimate in crony capitalism and that brings us to the money.
Only by stopping these senseless fights with each other and putting the blame where it belongs do we stand a chance to hang onto liberty and the right to pursue our own destiny.
MONEY, MONEY, Money… in the form of a carbon tax.
These politicians want more money. A carbon tax would be a windfall for them. Do you think the powers of the UN actually care about anything but money?
That’s why the CAGW argument is now political, the refutation of the CAGW theory must be down-played with ever more shrill doom-saying.
The US Coast Guard Academy has an honor code. It does not tolerate lying, cheating, or stealing. Obama would have been dismissed on day 1 for lying. The same honor code as the other 3 service academies. It is sad to me that our men and women in uniform in the US have a pathological liarvas their commander in chief.
Sadly, those CG midshipmen had to sit through their CiC’s blatant lies. Obama lies like the sunrise everyday, an expectation.
PS. I graduated from the the USAF Academy and went on to serve 20 yrs of service to my country. If I had lied just once like Obama does on record almost everyday, I would have been dismissed. Thankfully for myself, I never had to serve under a CIC who lied so easily (Clinton wasclose though).
In his address to the Academy he said “… we have to act and act now … “.
He was acting (putting on a show). It would have been priceless if someone from the audience would have pointed this out.
Everything Politicians say is absolutely true, except for the rare subject of which you happen to have in-depth knowledge.
For some time now we’ve had people peddling the myth that the major cause of war and conflict is religion. Now we have another myth to go along with it: that wars are caused by climate change. Maybe sooner or later we’ll have people claiming that climate change is caused by religion.Perhaps Richard Dawkins could write a book called, ‘The Climate Change Delusion’. It would be as reliable as his other well-known book, ‘The God Delusion’, and inform us that climate change is not caused by carbon emissions but by belief in God.
Why wait 100 years?…. thes sea-level in my creek has risen four feet TWICE, …. TODAY!
Mr. Obama is a complete and total embarrassment. He’s such a big liar I can’t stand to hear him speak.
Gepetto made him so that his ears grew bigger every time he lied.
You’re not the only one. I point out his idiocy to my kids on a daily basis. Yes…to-my-kids.
In Fig 1, the simulated baseline pressure is off (biased) so they just want to mention the trends. Second, at the peak of warming of the Holocene (up to 6000 yrs ago), the entire Sahara desert was a grassland/woodland with some huge lakes, which the models can’t simulate.
None of this matters when you have a brainwashed populace to control.
Obama steps off proudly into the Big Muddy.
=========
Waste deep in the Green Muck, the big fools says to push on.
=========